ME. ST. G. MIVAET ON THE SKELETON OF THE PRIMATES. 199 



(PI. XL. fig. 2 h). About halfway down it approximates more or less towards the 

 middle line of the posterior surface of the femur. 



On the opposite side of the bone a more or less marked line, or rugose tract, extends 

 from the base of the great trochanter downwards towards the external condyle'. The 

 posterior surface of the femur, between these two lines, is more or less rough and 

 irregular, and contrasts with the smoothness of the rest of the shaft. 



As in Troglodytes, so also in Simia, thei-e is no strongly marked ridge descending 

 quite to the ectocondyloid prominence (as is the case in Man), neither does any ridge 

 run downwards from the lesser trochanter. 



Below the great trochanter, and more or less in the course of the long line descending 

 towards the external condyle, there is a marked and rough depressed surface for the 

 gluteus maximus (PI. XL. fig. 4 g). The lower end of this depression does not reach to 

 the middle of the bone's vertical extent. 



As in Troglodytes, the popliteal space is flatter than is the case in Man. 



The entocondyloid prominence (PI. XL. figs. 1 & 2 ^) is somewhat more developed 

 than in Troglodytes, but not quite so much so as in Man. The ectocondyloid one 

 is about the same as in the last-named genus, and therefore is more marked than 

 in the human femur (PI. XL. figs. 1 and 2 k). 



I have not seen a conspicuous medullary foramen on the posterior surface of the 

 femur in any one specimen of Simia. 



As in the higher forms, the neck is considerably more vertically than antero- 

 posteriorly extended. It forms with the shaft an angle (open inwards and downwards) 

 of about 155°, which is considerably greater than that in Man, or than that in tlie 

 Chimpanzee, and much more so than the corresponding angle in the Gorilla'. There 

 is nevertheless some slight individual variation in this angle. 



The great or peroneal trochanter never attains so high a level, compared with the head 

 of the bone, as in Man, and still less than as in Troglodytes. In shape it is very like 

 the corresponding part in the higher forms, except that it differs from that of the 

 Gorilla, and resembles that of the Chimpanzee, and still more that of Man, in its 

 peronead projection (PI. XL. figs. 1, 2, 4, 6 h) beyond the line of the external margin 

 of the shaft^. 



The lesser, or tibial, trochanter is shaped much as it is in the Chimpanzee, being less 

 elongated than is sometimes the case in the Gorilla, and less conical than in Man. 

 "Wlien looked at from above (PI. XL. figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 c) it appears, as also in Man 

 and the Chimpanzee, closer to the head of the bone than is the case in the Gorilla^ 



' Giving origin in part, probably, to tbe femoral portion of the Biceps, as ilr. W. S. Church notes its origin as 

 " extending from 2j inches below the great trochanter to within the same distance of the external condyle" 

 (Nat. Hist. Review, 1862, vol. ii. p. 8fi). 



^ See Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. p. 15, plate 7. 



' Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. p. 1-5. ' Owen, he. rit. plate 7. 



